I'm saying what they had was not a "healthy" relationship.But relationships like theirs does happen in the real world.All the time

Yes, when one of the partners is selfish and heartless. In this case MJ.

Quote:

Life's not that simple,I'm afraid.

Only if you're partnered with someone who's wrong for you.

Quote:

The whole theme of the movie is about how Peter is losing who he is.It's right there,even before the symbiote business

No, it's not. The only time Peter acts in any way bad towards MJ is when he pushes her away after finding out his Uncle's killer is still at large. Even then it was understandable, and she doesn't even make the effort to stay and support. She just nods and sods off.

A selfless more caring MJ would would have been like this:

Quote:

It's not a question of one of them being right or wrong.It's a lack of communication that gets them both in trouble

The only lack of communication was on MJ's behalf. Which puts her in the wrong. Peter's not psychic. He can't read her mind. If she has a problem and is not telling him then she's causing the rift between them.

Quote:

Again,I think it's a fairly realistic take on a relationship for a CBM.No one can say MJ is the standered hero worshipping,angel that most "Love interests" are made out to be.She fells more like a real person,with motives that are all her own.

What motives? She prefers guys with money and great jobs? She likes to use what ever guy she can get her claws into to satisfy her insecurities and selfish desires? That doesn't make her feel like any more of a real person than someone who is not selfish and is more caring. It just makes MJ look like a biotch.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Human Torch

Keep trying.

No need. You lost three posts back. All you're doing is helping me now, like when you used the idea that MJ was used to guys with money lol.

Quote:

But you didn't. Your only defense was MJ felt more strongly about a kiss than Peter did.

Yes, and she never told Peter that. Like she didn't tell him several other important things that were the cause of the rift between them because she never told him she had a problem.

Classic MJ behavior. Does she tell Harry she has feelings for Spidey? No. Does she tell John she has doubts about marrying him? No. Does she tell Peter any of the problems she had in SM-3? No.

All her fault. Fact.

Quote:

You obviously have a particular dislike for the way she was written,and you are broad brushing the whole character,because of your dislike.That's fine,but there's no point in me going over the same ground.

Yeah, I have a problem with love interests who unfairly treat the noble hero like dirt.

__________________
"Sometimes I remember it one way. Sometimes another. If I'm going to have a past, I prefer it to be multiple choice!"

Living large??? He's risking his life, breaking his back and had to suffer for years before a brief period when people finally cheered him on.

I'm saying "living large" from her point of view.The interesting thing is that she's not a totally sympathetic character.My only point is that there's two sides to every story/relationship.MJ is a fairly "damaged" woman.While I don't think that should excuse her,it helps to at least try to see things from her POV.But most people (men,in particular) don't want to put that much effort into examining her character, and would rather jump on the "MJ is a shrew!!!!!" bandwagon.

Edit:It's pretty amusing to note how a lot of fans can look into villain motivations and justify them,but won't give MJ the same benefit.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dragon

Then there's the Harry thing in Spidey 3. Harry makes a threat, and MJ, after seeing Peter save her and the city repeatedly, accepts Harry's threat as valid and tears into Peter even though she knows that her breaking up with him would do far more damage than anything Harry could inflict on him physically.

She treats other people around her like dirt without a thought for anyone's feelings except her own. She throws her feminine wiles around like ninja stars. In Spider-Man 1 alone she goes from Flash to Harry, to kissing Spider-Man while she's with Harry, to trying to be with Peter at the end.

Then in Spider-Man 2 she's engaged to John Jameson, while trying to get with Peter behind John's back, then she leaves John at the altar.

Then we have Spider-Man 3, where she is by far at her worst. She tells Peter to tell her he loves her, and then never says it back to him when he does. She gets angry at him when he tries to reassure her about the bad review she gets. She throws him a hateful jealous look when she realizes the crowd outside her theater are clapping for Spidey and not her. She doesn't tell Peter she got fired and then gets all upset when she claims he doesn't understand how she feels.

She gets annoyed and jealous that he did the sacred upside down kiss with Gwen for a publicity stunt, but it's ok for her to use the kiss on John Jameson, and that was a private intimate kiss. Should Peter get annoyed every time she kisses a guy in a play?

She gives into Harry's pathetic threat and dumps Peter. Harry doesn't threaten her life, or Aunt May's or anyone else's. Just Peter's. She knows first hand Peter is more than able to deal with Harry since she's seen him take on Green Goblin and Doc Ock successfully. Instead of just telling Peter what Harry is doing she breaks Peter's heart instead. What's even worse is that Harry can still try and kill Peter after this anyway.

She kisses Harry when she's with Peter. She's finally with the guy she's supposed to love and she still ends up kissing another guy anyway.

I'm saying "living large" from her point of view.The interesting thing is that she's not a totally sympathetic character.My only point is that there's two sides to every story/relationship.MJ is a fairly "damaged" woman.While I don't think that should excuse her,it helps to at least try to see things from her POV.But most people (men,in particular) don't want to put that much effort into examining her character, and would rather jump on the "MJ is a shrew!!!!!" bandwagon.

Edit:It's pretty amusing to note how a lot of fans can look into villain motivations and justify them,but won't give MJ the same benefit.

I don't disagree,but that's more a plot contrivance then anything.

The thing for me is this- I WOULD LOVE more complex characterization for EVERYONE in these CBMs. The thing that ticks me off about all of them is that the characters are far too simplistic. Their problems are cartoon/soap opera problems, not real ones. I have yet to see a relationship that I believed in any CBM. They're all: "This guy has to have a love interest, so...."

But in MJ's case, she never gets that she's doing anything wrong and Sam never worked to make her get it. Damn right she's damaged, and with serious father issues. But does she do anything about it? No- she just gripes at Peter.
She isn't fleshed out well. She was simply supposed to be the complication in Peter's life. Peter's life as Spider-Man is gauged based on how it affects his relationship with MJ. (The story is after all, "all about a girl" )
In Spidey 2 Peter can't be at MJ's performances. In Spidey 3 Peter is too self-absorbed to be sensitive to MJ's pain. When does PETER get some understanding? When does someone look at how hard his life is and his self-sacrifice and how that might actually drive him a little crazy? You said above that we'll understand a villain better than MJ. But the same goes for Peter. He's a jerk because he doesn't listen to MJ whine about bad reviews. Did she ever ask him about the dangers he faces?

__________________Kwai Cheng: Old man, how is it that you hear these things?Master Po: Young man, how is it that you do not?

Yes I think Mary Jane is a person who very much cares about her own feeling a lot. She is highly guarded about her own feelings and will run off if something isn't catering well to her feelings. She often falls back on the abused accuse quite a lot it seems (well if KD's commentary is anything to go by.) And depending on how personal the issue of abuse is to you, might depend on how much understanding you have of the character.

I think regarding the relationship, what I will say is that it was at least realistic. Realistic in the sense it mirrors many other relationships out there, particularly ones where one of them has a greater significance/ importance/ fame/ destiny than the other one. There is a touch of jealousy there and a touch of 'Is this how it will always be, you getting all the glory and attention and me just picking up the pieces?'

Of course she was written quite badly in SM3. All I can say in her defense is that you really have no idea how her character behaved in-between SM2 and 3. You don't know if she was the perfect, supportive, obedient, cheerful housewife/ actress. Who, while happy with Peter eventually watched by as he got more and more consumed with his life of Spider-Man, to the point where she barely recognizes him anymore... and then that is where SM3 picks up; where they are still happy, but that Peter just has touches of pride/ arrogance and that MJ's life is sliding down.

It doesn't excuse the things she did and the way she was written. I will say coming from the words of Avi Arad himself the series often seemed to be 'Beat Peter Parker up.' You see this in full significance in SM2, where his life just goes from bad to worse and worse again, until he finally gets MJ. I agree MJ was often used as a plot device as she was 'the girl' he had to win. I also think Mary Jane perhaps had some kind of misguided idea that she was so much more fantastically beautiful than Peter and that he was very lucky to have her for that reason. The problem with that is that Kirsten was neither anymore attractive than Tobey, nor did the team try and make her look more appealing or alluring, to at least be able to see visually why all these guys would be going gaga for her. If they'd hired Elisha Cuthburt who I know auditioned for the part, this might have made sense. Because lets face it, her character wasn't funny, charming, kind, considerate, smart, and by the looks of SM3 a particularly good performer either, all she had going for her really is her looks, which she didn't have.

But truthfully, that should not really matter, because regardless of who was in the role, she still would have seemed *****y and selfish. I guess you can blame 1. The writers/ producers 2. Kirsten for insisting of having Mary Jane look plain and 3. For Sam Raimi for needing it always to be 'Make Peter's life as hard as possible.'

You keep saying it was realistic. So what? We know there's selfish *****es out there who use guys and don't care about anyone but themselves. That doesn't mean we want to be subjected to one as the main love interest for three movies, or that's it's a good idea to saddle Peter with one.

__________________
"Sometimes I remember it one way. Sometimes another. If I'm going to have a past, I prefer it to be multiple choice!"

I don't even care that she's selfish and still the main love interest for three movies. The problem is that she's never ever addressed as the selfish person she is. On the contrary, she's treated by the movie as the perfect dreamy girl a hero deserves, and Peter's blindness to her actions is also never addressed. He is supposed to be right about loving this woman. If he loses her, it's a tragedy somehow.

While I am unaware of your intentions or social views, the final statement in your post is misogynistic. Note: this criticism is not directed to you, as a person, but, the question/claim you posited at the end of the post is quite socially inappropriate. Male superheoes in cinema are given a free pass; do we shame Iron Man or Batman for the numerous one night stands they have? Secondly, dating does not equate to sex; there is no onscreen evidence that she held sexual congress with anyone. But, if she did, I return to my original question: so what? What is wrong with a woman expressing our sexuality? The infuriating tension (and double standard) in our society is that promiscuity in heteronormative men is promoted, while all of the dread/rage is evacuated into the female, as a population and idea.

Sexual intimacy is absent in the Raimi films; all of the intimacy that is present is in chronemics (time) and proximics (space.) Hence, if we examine the films with this criteria, we see that Peter is a very homosocial figure. While he does not engage in sex with other men, he spends ample time with them, especially the ones who possess sexually appealing bodies (cough, cough, Harry.) If anything, it is peculiar that he spends more time with men, whether it is Osborn, Ock, Harry, or JJJ, than he does with women. The screentime he has with the males figures definitely reinforces this; hence, Peter is a very strange figure.

Now, this not a proper critical reading of the films; I would be more detailed and jargon-oriented; my point of this post is to point out that it is wrong to evacuate dread onto the Woman, the figure and the idea, for possessing sexuality; the irony of the situation is that Raimi's films were far from possessing any traditional sexual energy associated with heternormative romances.

Again, please be careful with your wording: the Hype has a large female population, and there is no need to make them feel uncomfortable with language such as 'harlot' or shaming sexuality.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedBlueWonder

Well done, your actually one of the few people on the Internet to convince me that I'm wrong. While I still think it was odd about the way that she had intimate moments with other people your right that we never know if they had sex. I used harlot as I thought it was more respectful than certain other words.
Oddly though, Of all my thoughts and feelings about the Rami Parker I never got an idea that there was a slight chance he was homosexual...

Well, I see that RBW has already responded apologetically. But you kinda jumped the gun in assuming he wouldn't feel the same about a man who dates every woman in his life. Of course the specific word "harlot" may not be applicable if that was the case. Food for thought.

On another note, I'm thinking Harry in the ASM series won't necessarily be MJ's type. Also, ASM Flash is much more relatable and I'd feel much better about MJ having a fling with him than with Joe Manganiello's Flash. John Jameson in SM2 was a broken character anyway. So if that were to happen many other things would need to be fixed first.

The thing is,if they didn't introduce the conflict between Pete & MJ and she stayed a goody two shoes,who happily endorsed each and every aspect of Pete's life while she inevitably waited to be kidnapped/rescued,people would've criticized her being a shallow written damsel in distress.

I think she's one of the most genuine leading ladies in a CBM.Only Tony & Pepper have an equally realistic take on the Super Hero/Girlfriend relationship.

Nobody asked for a conflict free relationship. They could have introduced a conflict without making MJ look like such a selfish horrible person three movies in a row. They managed it with Tony and Pepper.

__________________
"Sometimes I remember it one way. Sometimes another. If I'm going to have a past, I prefer it to be multiple choice!"

Sexual intimacy is absent in the Raimi films; all of the intimacy that is present is in chronemics (time) and proximics (space.) Hence, if we examine the films with this criteria, we see that Peter is a very homosocial figure. While he does not engage in sex with other men, he spends ample time with them, especially the ones who possess sexually appealing bodies (cough, cough, Harry.) If anything, it is peculiar that he spends more time with men, whether it is Osborn, Ock, Harry, or JJJ, than he does with women. The screentime he has with the males figures definitely reinforces this; hence, Peter is a very strange figure.

You didn't type this with a straight face, did you? Because Peter simply from the dialogue doesn't spend anymore time with the male figures he's acquainted with than MJ. In fact it's very clearly explained that at most points MJ is the only one Peter devotes his free time to. Aside from Aunt May- unless you want to present an incest innuendo as well.

Sexual intimacy is absent (although not really, how many thought the upside kiss was the hottest ever on film?) because he knows these are movies that people will be taking their children to see. And perhaps being a father himself, doesn't feel the need to have Peter screwing MJ and whomever else may wander into his web.

In Spidey 2, Harry also says he hasn't seen much of Peter: "Taking Pictures of Spider-Man?" And JJJ and Ock? REALLY? He meets with Ock all of one time before the accident. JJJ? He's his BOSS. It would require that they spend some time together to get assignments and you know, get paid. Why didn't you lump Robbie in there? Although there are also the relationships Peter has with Betty (She's very clearly attracted to him), Ursula and Gwen. So why would you focus on a possible gay theme rather than Peter being a womanizer? Women are certainly his focus as he's strutting down the street in 3. Maybe he actually did take a few of them up on their requests for Spidey to carry them off.

__________________Kwai Cheng: Old man, how is it that you hear these things?Master Po: Young man, how is it that you do not?

You keep saying it was realistic. So what? We know there's selfish *****es out there who use guys and don't care about anyone but themselves. That doesn't mean we want to be subjected to one as the main love interest for three movies, or that's it's a good idea to saddle Peter with one.

So, you don't like the MJ from ASM comics before she disappeared for a few years?

Peter Parker eventually gravitates towards Gwen Stacy (the character Peter was meant to be with, according to original writer and creator Stan Lee). Mary Jane stays in Peter’s social circle and eventually dates Harry Osborn, though she continues to keep an eye on peter. She continues to display her “wild” side, which is perfectly demonstrated in Amazing Spider-Man #59, where Mary Jane gets a job dancing at a new club which becomes the source of the action for the next two issues.

Quote:

Mary Jane Dumps Harry Osborn

Mary Jane lets Harry know she’s “nobody’s girl”, which in part leads him into a drug problem in Amazing Spider-Man #97. In this classic trilogy of issues beggining in #96, we find the first issues not approved by the Comic Code Authority. All in all, some more classic Mary Jane Watson comic book attitude.

There is no real difference between MJ in the movies and in the comic until the came back.

You are having a laugh! When MJ learns what happened to Harry because she broke up with him, she feels incredibly guilty, realizes the consequences of her wild party kind of lifestyle she liked to have, and stops being the 'party girl'. Here I posted this above. Classic example of a changed more mature and caring MJ:

Peter bites her head off and pushes her away, but she stays anyway.

Where in the Spider-Man trilogy does MJ show any guilt or remorse for any of her selfish actions? When does she even try and change her ways?

Yes that's right, never. Hence why that comic book MJ was a saint in comparison.

__________________
"Sometimes I remember it one way. Sometimes another. If I'm going to have a past, I prefer it to be multiple choice!"

You are having a laugh! When MJ learns what happened to Harry because she broke up with him, she feels incredibly guilty, realizes the consequences of her wild party kind of lifestyle she liked to have, and stops being the 'party girl'.

You can't ignore the characterisation up to this point in the comic timeline. Before they changed her she was exactly like she was in SM1 and SM2.

Quote:

Here I posted this above. Classic example of a changed more mature and caring MJ:

Peter bites her head off and pushes her away, but she stays anyway.

Yes, like MJ in SM3 after Peter hurt her in the restaurent scene.
BTW:A few issues later she refused his proposal and run away.

Quote:

Where in the Spider-Man trilogy does MJ show any guilt or remorse for any of her selfish actions? When does she even try and change her ways?

"Selfish actions"? In SM3 she put Peter over her own feelings after she got fired. She came looking for him after May called her.

Quote:

Yes that's right, never. Hence why that comic book MJ was a saint in comparison.

You can't ignore the characterisation up to this point in the comic timeline. Before they changed her she was exactly like she was in SM1 and SM2.

No she wasn't. She didn't go through guys like a hot knife through butter, and try to score with other guys while dating someone.

Quote:

Yes, like MJ in SM3 after Peter hurt her in the restaurent scene.

How did Peter hurt her in the restaurant? What did he do that was so terrible?

Quote:

BTW:A few issues later she refused his proposal and run away.

That's right, because she wasn't ready to get married. You see unlike Dunst's MJ, she doesn't agree to marry someone when she doesn't really love them, and then jilt them at the altar.

Quote:

"Selfish actions"? In SM3 she put Peter over her own feelings after she got fired. She came looking for him after May called her.

When did she put Peter over her own feelings? She tells Peter to tell her he loves her, and then never says it back to him when he does. She gets angry at him when he tries to reassure her about the bad review she gets. She throws him a hateful jealous look when she realizes the crowd outside her theater are clapping for Spidey and not her. She doesn't tell Peter she got fired and then gets all upset when she claims he doesn't understand how she feels.

She gets annoyed and jealous that he did the sacred upside down kiss with Gwen for a publicity stunt, but it's ok for her to use the kiss on John Jameson, and that was a private intimate kiss. Should Peter get annoyed every time she kisses a guy in a play?

She gives into Harry's pathetic threat and dumps Peter. Harry doesn't threaten her life, or Aunt May's or anyone else's. Just Peter's. She knows first hand Peter is more than able to deal with Harry since she's seen him take on Green Goblin and Doc Ock successfully. Instead of just telling Peter what Harry is doing she breaks Peter's heart instead. What's even worse is that Harry can still try and kill Peter after this anyway.

She kisses Harry when she's with Peter. She's finally with the guy she's supposed to love and she still ends up kissing another guy anyway.

Quote:

Not really...

Yes really. Undeniably so.

__________________
"Sometimes I remember it one way. Sometimes another. If I'm going to have a past, I prefer it to be multiple choice!"

No she wasn't. She didn't go through guys like a hot knife through butter, and try to score with other guys while dating someone.

She tried to make an statement on Peter while she was in a relationship with Harry.
She had a lot of partners or close friends in the comics, too.

Quote:

How did Peter hurt her in the restaurant? What did he do that was so terrible?

You mean besides speaking about himself after MJ was fired?
Or hide his friendship with Gwen from her?

Quote:

That's right, because she wasn't ready to get married. You see unlike Dunst's MJ, she doesn't agree to marry someone when she doesn't really love them, and then jilt them at the altar.

MJ dumped every person in the comics when she came very close to them. So she "always" run away.

And it's unfair to compare MJ in SM2 to the comic version. SM2 plays 2 years after the first one. And it was Peter who dumped her. And it was Peter who came back into her life.

Quote:

When did she put Peter over her own feelings? She tells Peter to tell her he loves her, and then never says it back to him when he does. She gets angry at him when he tries to reassure her about the bad review she gets. She throws him a hateful jealous look when she realizes the crowd outside her theater are clapping for Spidey and not her. She doesn't tell Peter she got fired and then gets all upset when she claims he doesn't understand how she feels.

She did not tell him about her job because she did not wanted to destroy his day. Yes she put Peter over her own feelings.
Everything else is normal for an human and gives these characters depth.

Quote:

She gets annoyed and jealous that he did the sacred upside down kiss with Gwen for a publicity stunt, but it's ok for her to use the kiss on John Jameson, and that was a private intimate kiss. Should Peter get annoyed every time she kisses a guy in a play?

There is a difference: MJ thought this kiss would be special for both. The was wrong.
I don't get your complain. It makes both character more real because they have different opinions.

Quote:

She kisses Harry when she's with Peter. She's finally with the guy she's supposed to love and she still ends up kissing another guy anyway.

she regretted it. You know that is your example that comic MJ would be a saint in comparision with the movie version.

She tried to make an statement on Peter while she was in a relationship with Harry.

That is not the same as going through guy after guy when she had no interest in them at all, even agreeing to marry one of them. Apples and oranges. Hence why comic MJ is a saint by comparison.

Quote:

She had a lot of partners or close friends in the comics, too.

Name them.

Quote:

You mean besides speaking about himself after MJ was fired?

Oh you mean speaking about himself because he didn't know MJ was fired because she never bothered her ass to tell him?

The heartless bastard! How dare he not read her mind and know what happened.

Quote:

Or hide his friendship with Gwen from her?

"She's just a girl in my class". She wasn't his friend. They didn't hang out outside of the classroom.

Quote:

MJ dumped every person in the comics when she came very close to them. So she "always" run away.

Who are all these guys you're talking about?

Quote:

And it's unfair to compare MJ in SM2 to the comic version. SM2 plays 2 years after the first one. And it was Peter who dumped her. And it was Peter who came back into her life.

Two things:

1. Peter never dumped her because they were never together to start with. He rejected her advances.
2. He never left her life either. He just had not seen her much lately because of his jobs, college and life as Spidey. He fell off the radar with Harry, too.

So the comparison is very valid.

Quote:

She did not tell him about her job because she did not wanted to destroy his day. Yes she put Peter over her own feelings.

I'm not talking about on the Spider-Man Day. I'm talking about any time after that. He had to find out from Harry.

Quote:

Everything else is normal for an human and gives these characters depth.

Being selfish and two faced isn't giving her depth. it just makes her unlikable.

Quote:

There is a difference: MJ thought this kiss would be special for both. The was wrong.

No, she was using it as a litmus test to see if she got the same heat from it with John than she did with Spidey. The point is she used the kiss herself on another guy she didn't even love.

The fact that she had to kiss a guy upside down to see if she liked him just shows how utterly stupid she is. She's not mentally equipped to be with someone.

Quote:

I don't get your complain. It makes both character more real because they have different opinions.

Having different opinions doesn't make characters more real lol. How does that work?

Quote:

she regretted it. You know that is your example that comic MJ would be a saint in comparision with the movie version

And she is. Have you ever seen comic MJ kiss another guy, let alone Peter's best friend, when she was with Peter?

__________________
"Sometimes I remember it one way. Sometimes another. If I'm going to have a past, I prefer it to be multiple choice!"

Regarding the above debate, it does need to be clarified that when talking about comic book MJ or any other character for that matter, we have to remember that there are always inconsistencies because of the change-up of writing duties.

When MJ was dating Harry, it was under Stan's pen, who considered Gwen to be THE ONE for Peter. So when MJ was making Harry jealous and feeling rejected it was more as a stressor to push Harry toward his drug problem (Which he already had according to the text, but just managed to keep hidden).

When MJ rejected Peter's proposal (Which was a good 5 years after Gwen's death) it was pretty clear that they weren't even close to being ready for marriage and reading the issues leading up to it, it was a pretty strange request from Peter. It seemed more like he saw Harry and Liz together, Flash and Sha-Shan, hell even Jonah and Marla and just felt he wanted a stable relationship. But he and MJ weren't at that point. In fact even though they had become an item back in ASM #149 at the end of Clone Saga 1, their relationship seemed to become an afterthought rather than the persistent thing in Peter's life that Gwen was. True, MJ did kind of blow Peter off suggesting that she wanted to be free to "date" other guys. But at least she was honest.

The difference with movie MJ is that comic book MJ was always held accountable for her selfishness. Peter would always tell her straight when she was being a b****. The movies never once called her out, even if it was to suggest that she needed to get her father/rejection issues under control. Somehow Peter was always the one that was wrong.

__________________Kwai Cheng: Old man, how is it that you hear these things?Master Po: Young man, how is it that you do not?